What is a breach of fiduciary duty?

Useful Rulings on Professional Negligence – Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Recent Rulings on Professional Negligence – Breach of Fiduciary Duty

126-150 of 785 results

JOSE E SANCHEZ, ET AL VS AURA PATRICIA CHICAS, ET AL

Alfaro, d/b/a Household Realty and/or Antelope Realty (“Alfaro”, and collectively the “Defendants”) Plaintiffs filed the Complaint in this action on March 22, 2018, alleging eight (8) causes of action for (1) Rescission; (2) Claim & Delivery; (3) Conversion; (4) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (5) Professional Negligence; (6) Negligent Misrepresentation; (7) Intentional Misrepresentation; and (8) Fraud.

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

EMMA ANGELICA MCKINNON VS MINNESOTA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.

The Complaint alleges five causes of action for: 1) professional negligence; 2) breach of fiduciary duty; 3) Financial Elder Abuse; 4) Intentional Deceit/Fraud; and 5) Declaratory Relief. The Complaint alleges that Plaintiff is an elder and a widow who was the victim of an investment scam by Defendants. She generally alleges that after her husband’s death, she was emotionally and mentally vulnerable and Defendant took advantage of her.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HERO DOGS SEASON ONE LLC, ET AL. VS DEAN A. AVEDON, ET AL.

The FAC asserts causes of action for (1) professional malpractice; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) professional negligence; (4) conversion; and (5) legal malpractice. Plaintiffs assert the first four causes of action against Avedon and Bemel Ross & Avedon (collectively, “Avedon Defendants”) and the fifth cause of action against Beitchman and Beitchman & Zekian (collectively, “Beitchman Defendants”). The FAC alleges in pertinent part as follows.

  • Hearing

    Sep 27, 2019

YUWANDA SAMANUKORN, ET AL VS. JPCL DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL

The FAC alleges causes of action for: (1) Fraud and Deceit; (2) Negligent Misrepresentation; (3) Constructive Fraud; (4) Breach of Statutory Duty; (5) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (6) Breach of Contract; (7) Professional Negligence; (8) Negligent Misrepresentation; (9) Professional Negligence; and (10) Breach of Implied Covenant Against Encumbrances.

  • Hearing

    Sep 27, 2019

JOI STEPHENS, ET AL. V. REICKER, PFAU, PYLE & MCROY, LLP, ET AL.

However, it is apparent to the Court that the causes of action for professional negligence and breach of fiduciary duty are not based upon any claim that defendants were negligent in these representations.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2019

AIDA A LIMA VS WESTERN SURETY, INC., ET AL.

Second Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duty) The elements of a cause of action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty are (1) a fiduciary duty; (2) breach of that duty; and (3) damage caused by the breach. (Charnay v. Cobert (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 170, 182; Stanley v. Richmond (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1070, 1086.) In the FAC, Lima alleges that Schroeder breached his fiduciary duty to her by threatening to interfere with her guardianship case if she did not have a sexual relationship with him.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

EMMA ANGELICA MCKINNON VS MINNESOTA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.

The Complaint alleges five causes of action for: 1) professional negligence; 2) breach of fiduciary duty; 3) Financial Elder Abuse; 4) Intentional Deceit/Fraud; and 5) Declaratory Relief. The Complaint alleges that Plaintiff is an elder and a widow who was the victim of an investment scam by Defendants. She generally alleges that after her husband’s death, she was emotionally and mentally vulnerable and Defendant took advantage of her.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

GILLIS VS MILLER RE: DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT OF DANIEL GILLIS BY DIANE FLAHERTY, HK LANE PALM DESERTINC

Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges 7 causes of action for: 1) breach of contract, 2) negligence, 3) professional negligence, 4) negligent misrepresentation, 5) fraudulent concealment, 6) fraud and deceit, and 7) breach of fiduciary duty. Plaintiffs assert the 3rd cause of action against HK and Flaherty and the 4th cause of action against Flaherty.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2019

MAYESKI VS NAUTILUS HEALTHCARE INC PIMAGED]

Plaintiffs concede their cause of action for General Negligence is subsumed by the cause of action for Professional Negligence and characterize their cause of action for Willful Misconduct as "superfluous." (Plaintiffs' Opposition, 7:5-11.) As to the Cause of Action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty, plaintiffs identify no other basis for the purported existence of a fiduciary duty separate and apart from the duty created by the physician/ patient relationship.

  • Hearing

    Sep 12, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

MAYESKI VS NAUTILUS HEALTHCARE INC PIMAGED]

Plaintiffs concede their cause of action for General Negligence is subsumed by the cause of action for Professional Negligence and characterize their cause of action for Willful Misconduct as "superfluous." (Plaintiffs' Opposition, 7:5-11.) As to the Cause of Action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty, plaintiffs identify no other basis for the purported existence of a fiduciary duty separate and apart from the duty created by the physician/ patient relationship.

  • Hearing

    Sep 12, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

XUE LENG GARD VS ANGELA WALLACE ET AL

Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) fraud; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) negligence; (4) fraud; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) professional negligence; (7) civil conspiracy to commit fraud; (8) professional negligence; (9) professional negligence; (10) negligence; and (11) negligence.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ARENAS ENTERTAINMENT LLC VS KATZ CASSIDY ACCOUNTANCY CORPORA

Breach of Fiduciary Duty “Justifiable reliance” is not commonly stated as one of the elements of a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. Rather, the “elements of a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty are: (1) the existence of a fiduciary duty; (2) the breach of that duty; and (3) damage proximately caused by the breach.” (IIG Wireless, Inc. v. Yi (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 630, 646.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2019

ALONA SUDORZHENKO VS YOUSEF MONADJEMI

“[A] breach of fiduciary duty is a species of tort distinct from a cause of action for professional negligence. The elements of a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty are: (1) existence of a fiduciary duty; (2) breach of the fiduciary duty; and (3) damage proximately caused by the breach.” (Stanley v. Richmond (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1070, 1086.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 06, 2019

WILLIAM PARRISH VS MICHAEL AVENATTI ET AL

Timothy Fitzgibbons filed their complaint in this action asserting five causes of action: (1) professional negligence; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) fraud—concealment; (4) conversion; and, (5) promissory estoppel. The complaint alleges that this case arises from professional misconduct and dereliction of duty by lawyer-defendant Michael J. Avenatti, his law firms, law partners and employees. (Complaint, ¶ 2.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2019

BLANCA MICHEL VS SANDRA I. SANTOYO

Serratos) Breach of Fiduciary Duty (v. 24Hour Real Estate & Reyes) Negligent Misrepresentation (v. 24Hour Real Estate & Reyes) B&P 17200 (v. 24Hour Real Estate & Reyes) Negligence (v. Escrownet) [The SAC then repeats the 16th cause of action, but now is alleged as a Breach of Fiduciary Duty (v. Escrownet); the 17th cause of action is now alleged as B&P 17200 (v. Escrownet); and the SAC skips the 18th cause of action.] Aiding and Abetting (v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARCO LOPEZ VS. ELVA ARNAJO

Based on these facts, the SAC asserts causes of action for: Quiet Title Professional Negligence Breach of Fiduciary Duty Intentional Misrepresentation Negligent Misrepresentation Conspiracy to Defraud Debt Collection Harassment 1st CAUSE OF ACTION QUIET TITLE: The complaint shall be verified and shall include all of the following: (a) A description of the property that is the subject of the action. In the case of tangible personal property, the description shall include its usual location.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

MICHAEL W. PINCHER VS ANTELOPE VALLEY HEALTHCARE DISTRICT

against AVHD, Entabi, and Wan only; and (7) Breach of Fiduciary Duty against Entabi and Wan only.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2019

YANAN TANG VS LAW OFFICE OF JOEL SPENCE

Law Office of Joel Spence DEMURRER Moving Party: Defendant Law Offices of Joel Spence Responding Party: Plaintiff Yanan Tang RELIEF REQUESTED: Sustain Demurrer to First Amended Complaint CAUSES OF ACTION: From First Amended Complaint 1) Professional Negligence 2) Breach of Fiduciary Duty 3) Negligent Supervision 4) IIED FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND: Plaintiff Yanan Tang alleges that she entered into an agreement with defendant Joel Spence, pursuant to which defendant agreed to represent plaintiff

  • Hearing

    Aug 30, 2019

GUSTAVO SALAZAR VS BHARAT PATEL

The complaint alleges medical battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and lack of informed consent for a negligently performed transurethral microwave therapy procedure that occurred on July 15, 2016. On February 19, 2019, the Court deemed Plaintiff’s complaint as filed on January 8, 2019. On July 18, 2019, Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 438.

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

GUSTAVO SALAZAR VS BHARAT PATEL

The complaint alleges medical battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and lack of informed consent for a negligently performed transurethral microwave therapy procedure that occurred on July 15, 2016. On February 19, 2019, the Court deemed Plaintiff’s complaint as filed on January 8, 2019. On July 18, 2019, Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 438.

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

XIAOZHE CUI, ET AL. VS KEVIN LIU, ET AL.

Demurrer to the second cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND on the ground the pleading is confusing. The general allegations allege that “Defendant Kevin Liu” requested and received funds and that such funds were “used for Defendant’s personal purposes.” (Comp. ¶ 19.) This appears to allege that Liu was the only defendant that used the plaintiffs’ funds for his personal purposes.

  • Hearing

    Aug 16, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARTIN P MONTOYA VS. MELODY L GROVER

Grover's claims for professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent misrepresentation have a two-year statute of limitations. Hydro-Mill Co., Inc. v. Hayward, Tilton & Rolapp Ins. Associates, Inc. (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 1145, 1154-1155. The SAXC alleges cross-defendants' breach of fiduciary duty continued through April 21, 2017. SAXC, ¶ 52. Thus, these claims should have been brought by April 20, 2019. Grover argues that the relation-back doctrine applies to Doe amendments.

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS INC VS MIAO

TENTATIVE RULINGS The demurrer of cross-defendant Paul Hastings LLP ("Paul Hastings") to defendants/cross-complainants Gang "Gary" Chen and Zhenwei "David" Miao's claims in their first amended cross-complaint ("FACC") for negligent and intentional misrepresentation (ninth cause of action), the tenth cause of action for concealment, professional negligence (twelfth cause of action), and breach of fiduciary duty (thirteenth cause of action) are overruled.

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS INC VS MIAO

TENTATIVE RULINGS The demurrer of cross-defendant Paul Hastings LLP ("Paul Hastings") to defendants/cross-complainants Gang "Gary" Chen and Zhenwei "David" Miao's claims in their first amended cross-complaint ("FACC") for negligent and intentional misrepresentation (ninth cause of action), the tenth cause of action for concealment, professional negligence (twelfth cause of action), and breach of fiduciary duty (thirteenth cause of action) are overruled.

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS INC VS MIAO

TENTATIVE RULINGS The demurrer of cross-defendant Paul Hastings LLP ("Paul Hastings") to defendants/cross-complainants Gang "Gary" Chen and Zhenwei "David" Miao's claims in their first amended cross-complaint ("FACC") for negligent and intentional misrepresentation (ninth cause of action), the tenth cause of action for concealment, professional negligence (twelfth cause of action), and breach of fiduciary duty (thirteenth cause of action) are overruled.

  • Hearing

    Aug 15, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 32     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.